Now, see, I take that as more of a hypothetical being offered up by the Inquisitor, not evidence that such magic exists.
It's not definite, but from the dialogue I understood it is possible, just hard to get access to. And frowned upon in Tevinter. So it's some sort of forbidden/dangerous magic.
(It probably does exist, but it's probably pretty serious blood magic. Even the Mirror of Transformation doesn't let you change genders willy-nilly.)
Do we have any clue of it's existance?, I mean, even all the ancient dudes we know haven't shown any ability to modiffy their human form further from their age, and there is Corypheus, but that was some kind of possession that ultimately ended with him shapeshifting back to his "real" form.
None whatsoever.Do we have any clue of it's existance?, I mean, even all the ancient dudes we know haven't shown any ability to modiffy their human form further from their age, and there is Corypheus, but that was some kind of possession that ultimately ended with him shapeshifting back to his "real" form.
None whatsoever.
The Baroness did use magic to maintain a youthful appearance, though that required blood sacrifices. Flemeth can change her appearance but can't become younger without apparently switching bodies.
Wait, I think there was evidence that Flemeth truly doesn't switch bodies.
I wrote nothing of the sort. I wrote players will follow their moral standards. Yours hold that there is nothing wrong with homosexual relationships between females, and so you are okay playing those. So what do your morals say about homosexual relationships between males?
Which is total nonsense and you seem to assume that you know what players look for in their games. Furthermore the use of the word "moral" suggests that anything the player does not do that aligns with themselves personally would be "amoral".
I don't have any "morals" regarding homosexual relationships between males, because why should someone being in a same-sex relationship being objectional to anyone nor cause for any moralising at all?
I support same-sex relationships if that is what you meant, because why should two people who love each other, regardless of sex or gender-identity even register on anyone's radar as something worth commenting on?
Furthermore my previous post said that I have played same-sex romances of both genders in the past. My example simply pointed out that I have found female characters more enjoyable to play as (despite not being female myself), regardless of whether those particular characters were gay, straight or bi.
I almost always play Male Hawke as being bisexual and flirting with men as well as women, regarding of whom he ends up with.
Why can't I just keep using the character's last name?
Because her name is Maevaris or Mae.
That you refuse to call her by it suggests that you don't accept her name as being valid.
Are you sure you're not just projecting?
Why would I be projecting, exactly?
So what are you getting at here exactly? Are you trying to force me to change my style of reference regarding the Tilani character?
That she's a woman, so kindly acknowledge it and call her by her actual name, rather than refusing to do so and hiding your evident disdain.
Ah, I was right. You are projecting.
What slights?
And again, why would I be projecting? Please explain, if you are so certain of this?
If you want to know what slights... then I would please ask you to refer to Maevaris by what gender you think she is?
If you cannot, that suggests you are unwilling to admit to establishing the particular gender you think applies to her and have been thus far have been attempting to hide your dislike for her gender identity, choices and lifestyle and hoping that we wouldn't notice.
Let's try again.
Solas was also a last minute addition. Both he and Cullen were additional romances to the 6 they planned from the start, so the number is not set in stone.
And who says Mae's romance cannot include plot details like Solas' romance? People would create a dwarf male to get that part of the story, just like many created an elf female to learn more about elven lore from Solas'.
Instead of making another straight romance, a trans romance would cover a portion of players that has no choice available.
I know there are straight men here who would like 3 or 4 options, because Josephine was "too exotic," or not a "full option" (whatever you mean by it), or that Cassandra was too manly, but this is not a game for straight men only, but for everyone.
After DA2 BW said that they believe everyone should have equal choices, and not that straight men are the main demographic, so they will have more choices. If you want to get maximum appeal to the majority, you can play the 90% of games that do pander only to straight men. BW doesn't need to do anything additional for them, because everyone else already does.
But some people do. Again, there were straight men, who said they planned on romancing Cassandra or Josephine, but ended up with Dorian, because they found him so great.
Even during the first playthrough, people don't have to play their usual way.
People somehow managed to plan for gated romances in DAI, I'm sure they will be fine in 4.
The issue of gating and whether it's forcing people to vet the options before starting the game is a separate conversation. One that might not even apply to Maevaris, because it's not certain that her romance (if it happens) will be limited to male dwarves.
Ok, so you have absolutely no problems with Mae being a companion, you just think the romance is "not worthwhile," and "a waste." It's just other people that want to have an option not to deal with trans companions.
You're just advocating that their transphobia should be the priority for BW, and not going with the "agenda," because you think the bigger group has always priority.
Understood. So if there were more white supremacists willing to buy the game than people who want diversity, BW should follow the money and make all of the characters white, right?
There are three letter words, like she and her, that you can use to talk about Maevaris. You even used "her" in the quote above. And "him," "he" when talking about Dorian.
You could say "attack her," or "she has enemies." Your avoidance of pronouns makes your posts awkward to read.
It's obvious that you do this, because you don't want to call her a woman. Or you'd like to call her a man, but know the mods would ban you. Either way, it's petty. And I will not listen to you act coy and ignore what the others are saying for the next 60 pages.
No, they do not. They do romances they find interesting, which was apparent especially in DnD games, where people romanced characters with evil alignments. I have no idea how doing an in-game romance makes a statement about your morals.
Again - undefined character with no no certain gender or first name. If you said "I'd like Eustace to return, he was such a great protagonist," no one will know, who you're talking about. That's why we say Hawke, and since you can select their gender, people switch between he, she, and they.
We'll just have to agree to disagree on that.
No.
We're not talking about which DA game is better. You're refusing to call a woman by her name or by her correct pronouns. This isn't a debate.
Hopefully not, but the slights against Mae do not seem encouraging even if that's not the case.
Let's not summon back the "Cass looks like a man" bloke, it took forever to banish him to Tartarus.
I miss him sometimes. He had CHARTS and SCIENCE.
Or if we're talking about Lisme from Last Flight. The only canon non-binary DA character so far, AFAIK!
(Actually, Lisme presents as distinctly male sometimes and distinctly female other times, so maybe we should just alternate he and she? But since he's fictional and died during the Fourth Blight to boot we can't exactly ask her or check what he's wearing today so it might get confusing swapping back and forth. Gender neutrality might be the simplest option.)
I use 'they' for Lisme when talking about them with other fans. I can't remember if it's ever used for them in the book, though.
You'll have to type what you say, since I can't hear you.
So by not using any gender specific references at all, I am somehow "misgendering" the character? How is that realistically possible if I use no gender references whatsoever? Your claim is illogical.
I'm afraid I don't know what you mean. A victim of what exactly? What offense has been committed against me that I should take grievance with?
"Tilani" flows better. Less chance of a typo. I wouldn't want to get the name wrong after all.
And why is it a problem to use the character's last name? Why is it a problem to take no action in regard to pronouns?
It's clear when you avoid pronouns why you're doing it. Avoiding her pronuns is a deliberate move because you don't want to call Mae a woman. You don't use 'she' or 'her'. You don't use her name despite Mae being very easy to type.
Tilani is a longer name. It's harder to spell. Mae. M A E. Three letter. Same as Cass. It's not that hard. Mae has three letters. Cass has three unique letters. Cass is a badass. Mae is a badass. Cass is a woman. Mae is a woman. Cass goes by 'she' and 'her'. Mae goes by 'she' and 'her'.
You've immediately gone on the defensive when you've been called out, and done the whole 'well for Hawke it's okay' thing. You're presenting your oppontents as the aggressors by doing this.
And you still haven't answered my question: if Cass was trans would you reject her?
Wait, I think there was evidence that Flemeth truly doesn't switch bodies.
If you thought "Alexius" and "Erimond", you're right. But you would also be thinking of their last names. Their first names are "Gereon" and "Livius". Yet even Dorian refers to his former master as "Alexius".
Here's another quick question. What's Servis' first name? You don't even know it do you? Because he's mainly referred to by his last name "Servis" in dialog and in the list of agents.
So why can't the same apply to Magister Tilani? Hmmmm?
Because you don't EVER use pronouns for Mae.
She. Her. You've used 'he' and 'his' in that section above.
It's ONLY Mae you avoid doing this with.
"Tilani" flows better. Less chance of a typo. I wouldn't want to get the name wrong after all.
And why is it a problem to use the character's last name? Why is it a problem to take no action in regard to pronouns?
Grepher seems to have trouble understanding why purposefully omitting any gender-identifying names and pronouns when speaking about a trans woman might be hurtful to that woman and to any trans person in the fandom.
I will attempt to demonstrate to Grepher why it is a problem by purposefully ommitting Grepher's gender identity and the first word of Grepher's pseudonym. Does this sound weird, unnatural, and like I am going out of my way to not acknowledge Grepher by name or acknowledge Grepher's gender?
Does it make Grepher feel singled out and treated differently from others?
Does it make anyone who identifies with Grepher feel less like a person and feel less accepted for the identity they wish to have?
And what if Grepher had fought discrimination, undergone a lengthy and laborious transition and changed Grepher's entire life just because Grepher wished to be called by Grepher's gender... But instead Grepher gets to be called Grepher?
Does this make Grepher feel less like a person and more like... a Grepher?
I am only doing this because I think "Grepher" flows better, because it sounds like a slightly more evolved form of gremlin.
TL;DR: When someone endured a difficult transition because she wants to be a woman, and she makes it clear she is a woman now, please use the pronoun "her". Don't be a Grepher.
It would also anger a lot of straight male players.
Again, don't presume to speak for what others want or look for in terms of gaming content.
Straight male player here... actively not being offended or angered by trans romances, but advocating their inclusion.
Or do I somehow not count? 
But Tilani wouldn't be an option for straight men.
She's still a woman, so why can't a straight male be attracted to her, just because she's trans?
I'd romance her with a straight male character, if she were an option.
Why do you assume my motives are malicious? Perhaps I'm just being courteous to all of my fellow forum-goers by showing neutrality. Maybe I'm trying NOT to offend anyone.
If you're intending to not offend anyone, you're doing a bally awful job of it so far.
I mean that players will avoid content that offends their moral sensibilities.
Please don't assume you speak for other players and dictate their moral and personal sensibilities.
I do not avoid same-sex content because I happen to be straight, nor do I shy away from having my player characters engage in violent and underhanded means from time to time, despite that in the real world I do not qualify as a serial larcenist, murderer or sociopath.
It's called a roleplaying game for a reason, because you're not the character you're playing.
I just don't see what's so "offensive" about using a character's last name, regardless of who the character is. If I can use it for Hawke, or Pavus, or Pentaghast, then I should be able to use it for Tilani as well.
Indulge me for a moment here. I will ask you two simple questions. You have 1 second to answer each one.
Here we go...
Spoiler
Spoiler
The difference is that Servis, Erimond and Alexius are not trans individuals.
And doesn't it seem strange how you are suddenly seemingly able to use male pronouns when it comes to them, as well as remember and have no problem acknowledging their male sounding personal names.
It does make your stark refusal to do so with Mae is extremely telling and suggest you don't see her as a woman.
"Tilani" flows better. Less chance of a typo. I wouldn't want to get the name wrong after all.
And why is it a problem to use the character's last name? Why is it a problem to take no action in regard to pronouns?
Haha! This is one of the stupidest argument I've ever read!
"Tilani" flows better than "Mae"? Flows better than "she"? Tell me that this is a joke!
Look. My language has no gender-based personal pronoun. But I don't find more difficult to use "she" than "Tilani". Or maybe I'm so smart...
Which is total nonsense and you seem to assume that you know what players look for in their games. Furthermore the use of the word "moral" suggests that anything the player does not do that aligns with themselves personally would be "amoral".
I don't have any "morals" regarding homosexual relationships between males, because why should someone being in a same-sex relationship being objectional to anyone nor cause for any moralising at all?
I support same-sex relationships if that is what you meant, because why should two people who love each other, regardless of sex or gender-identity even register on anyone's radar as something worth commenting on?
Furthermore my previous post said that I have played same-sex romances of both genders in the past. My example simply pointed out that I have found female characters more enjoyable to play as (despite not being female myself), regardless of whether those particular characters were gay, straight or bi.
I almost always play Male Hawke as being bisexual and flirting with men as well as women, regarding of whom he ends up with.
Because her name is Maevaris or Mae.
That you refuse to call her by it suggests that you don't accept her name as being valid.
Why would I be projecting, exactly?
That she's a woman, so kindly acknowledge it and call her by her actual name, rather than refusing to do so and hiding your evident disdain.
And again, why would I be projecting? Please explain, if you are so certain of this?
If you want to know what slights... then I would please ask you to refer to Maevaris by what gender you think she is?
If you cannot, that suggests you are unwilling to admit to establishing the particular gender you think applies to her and have been thus far have been attempting to hide your dislike for her gender identity, choices and lifestyle and hoping that we wouldn't notice.
Ha ha ha! What an imagination you have, Sifr. You're mistaken about me.
Never argued otherwise. My argument was one of resources. Should BioWare spend time and money on a romance that very few people will see, or should they use those resources to make the main story better? Cullen and Solas were added as romances in part because the devs were done developing the plot. During the expanded time, they were just polishing the game, and some people had time to add more content to those two characters.
It would also anger a lot of straight male players.
But Tilani wouldn't be an option for straight men.
Of course they don't HAVE to, but they should. The majority of players are straight males. So we should get more options.Personally, my belief is that BioWare should allow for customizable romance characters.
But how many? It all comes back to my point. How many? Enough to justify spending the resources? Meaning, are these experimenters going to be enough to justify a Tilani romance in addition to the bisexual males who would choose it normally?
But most people play their usual way first.
Yeah, but that is a topic of concern is it not? And this is the thread for discussing such things, right?
Not in this case. I think that various viewpoints should be selectable options in a ROLEplaying game. That's the whole point of a roleplaying game. As for catering to audiences, that depends on the issue. On an issue like this, viewpoints should be equally available. In terms of content, the product should appear to the wider audience. That's just economics. BioWare can still have trans content, just give option for various views and the option to bypass it for those who don't want to explore it.
No, because Dragon Age isn't about skin color. But if BioWare used the game data it mines from peoples files and it showed that 95% of players showed no interest in that Avvar guy's ramblings about Snake Kings and Moon Men, what sense would it make to bring him back as a companion character in DA4?If 95% of people told BioWare they didn't want Tilani as a party companion, BioWare is well within their right to decide that they want the character as a companion anyway. But they should be aware of the risk they are taking, and they should take steps to ensure that the fanbase has the option to respond to the character however they want, or not recruit the character at all.Now, if 95% of players were to tell BioWare they didn't want to see any dragons in the next game, BioWare should simply ignore them. What are they playing Dragon Age for in that case?
I just don't see what's so "offensive" about using a character's last name, regardless of who the character is. If I can use it for Hawke, or Pavus, or Pentaghast, then I should be able to use it for Tilani as well.
Again, my gripe is about pronouns (although your fixation on her last name is also weird). You can believe you're being courteous all you want, that doesn't make it true. Treating a trans person as genderless is not being neutral.
As you said, even Dorian refers to him as Alexius. This is the name we're presented with. Unlike Maevaris.
TL;DR: When someone endured a difficult transition because she wants to be a woman, and she makes it clear she is a woman now, please use the pronoun "her". Don't be a Grepher.
I want to give your post more likes.
Grepher is really not dealing well with Grepher's opinions being disagreed with. You can tell by the fact that Grepher is is not writing in Grepher's responses much about the pronouns and Grepher keeps mentioning Hawke knowing well it's not the same thing.
(this sounds super natural and not at all awkward!)
Hodor Hodor
As a fun exercise, go to page 3 of this thread and search in-page for Tilani.
She's still a woman, so why can't a straight male be attracted to her, just because she's trans?
I'd romance her with a straight male character, if she were an option.
Certainly, some straight males can be attracted to a trans female. But some can't, and it's not necessarily due to bigotry. That's a pretty big mental dissonance to overcome.
I don't find qunari women attractive. They have all the things that other women have — breasts, feminine features, vaginas and so forth — but I just can't get over the fact they're qunari. I don't know why I prefer brunettes over blondes either.
"Well, it's all just roleplaying. It's not really you doing these things." Try saying that to people who can't let Alistair be executed at the Landsmeet or side with the templars in DA2 or exile the Grey Wardens.
Certainly, some straight males can be attracted to a trans female. But some can't. That's a pretty big mental dissonance to overcome.
I don't find qunari women attractive. They have all the things that other women have — breasts, feminine features, female genitals and so forth — but I just can't overcome my natural aversion to qunari.
Hey, I never, ever said otherwise, I always thought Mae had a V 'n' bewbs. But I haven't read the comic anyway.There is also something about penises that straight men find unappealing. They're funny like that.
And I'd suspect that Mae still got a big, veiny one.
Hey, I never, ever said otherwise, I always thought Mae had a V 'n' bewbs. But I haven't read the comic anyway.
She definitely does not have boobs. I can say that with certainty.
http://vignette2.wik...=20130713104235
Oh.She definitely does not have boobs. I can say that with certainty.
http://vignette2.wik...=20130713104235
No. Simply that players usually avoid content they have a moral aversion to. This could even be as simply as something like executing Alistair at the Landsmeet, or even just "betraying" him. I've seen players write that they just can't bring themselves to do it.
In fact, I think there's a whole thread about it somewhere. All the stuff you can't bring yourself to do in the DA games.
Except that you are trying to equate sexuality and gender identity with "morals" when it comes to personal choices someone can make. As if the choice to make good and bad decisions at all synonymous with what you assume constitutes "good" or "bad" sexuality, as well as sexuality itself being an actual choice someone makes rather than something intrinsic.
Granted, one can chose in a game to play as a character with another sexuality to their own, but in terms of the character themselves that exists within that universe, they didn't chose to be LGBT.
Okay, so that means you have no moral objection to homosexuality. A lot of players do though, and thus will likely avoid that content.
While it's impossible to deny that some might not seek to pursue that content, do not treat their objection to various romances, sexuality or related content as anything that has it's basis in actual morality.
So? The character's last name is Tilani, is it not?
And her first name is Mae, it's what she prefers to be addressed as, so kindly address her as such.
Ridiculous. I call the Alexius character by last name all the time, does that mean something too?
Don't pretend that it's the same thing and that you have not done so intentionally. You managed to refer to all three men by their first names and by the correct gender pronouns, so there's no reason you cannot extend the same level of courtesy towards Maevaris.
How would I know? You tell me. I only asked if you were.
No, you accused me of projecting twice.
I'm asking for clarification as to what makes you so certain of such a claim? Why do you claim I was projecting? For what reason? Because I happen to be straight and yet do not object to LGBT themes in gaming?
Evident disdain? I think you're imagining things.
Then refer to her as female and by her name, rather than refusing to do so. It's not hard.
"Mae is a beautiful, charming woman and I'd like to get to know her in the game."
There, see, I managed to do all three in one sentence.
Well you're throwing around baseless accusations and speculating on my motives. Incorrectly, might I add. So what else am I to think?
I'm not the one who accuses someone of projecting, then dodges the question when asked for clarification?
And how would that answer my question to you? Here's a better idea. How about you just tell me what slights you think I committed?
Because either it shows you accept her as a woman or you do not.
And as for actual slights that have occurred thus far in the thread;
You've repeatedly made thinly-veiled transphobic comments and insinuations directed against Mae and have not attempted to curb this tendency, despite people having repeatedly called you out on it and asking you to show better etiquette on numerous occasions?
Then can you kindly explain to us the reasons why that was not the case, as well as why we have all been horribly misunderstanding your intentions?
I really liked Mae and would love to see her in the next one, but I feel that a Magister running along side the PC through lands and dungeons may be a bit...silly. I already feel that Vivienne wouldn't really trudge through the swamps of the Fens - and it slightly bothered me. All other party members I could believe, even Dorian, who is excited by new adventures, despite his moaning and groaning about them. I think Mae, although, she seems more fun than Viv, wouldn't really go trudging through swamps, but as an adviser - or an important political figure that accompanies on specific missions, that would be really cool.
People would create a dwarf male to get that part of the story...
Well, I can't say with certainty, but Mae definitely has a very masculine body in Until We Sleep. And you'd think, as a magister, she would have access to magic that lets her go all the way.
Now, see, I take that as more of a hypothetical being offered up by the Inquisitor, not evidence that such magic exists.
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
